Not unless you sit on my lap, *my sweet* /stargeezer
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
BioWare: Mass Effect 3 Ending "Game Content Initiatives" News Coming In April
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
Not unless you sit on my lap, *my sweet* /stargeezer
The game has a shitload of problems other than the ending. If you want me to include the ending I could do a step by step analysis of why the ending is garbage. Just tell me how you want it.
RyanReedyMusic
Banned
Each has a personal preference to the ending. Why argue over it?
Anyone liking the ending doesn't care about the characters, lore, good storytelling, or the universe.
Dark energy is the the supposed thing causing the eventual heat death of our universe.
RyanReedyMusic
Banned
Thats your opinion aka personal preference. Not fact. There are people who do like the ending who obviously after hours of gameplay like the characters, lore, story telling, etc.
Randolph Freelander
Member
I am of the personal opinion that you haven't played the game. Am I right or am I right.
Believe me, the argument seems to be heavily tilted in the direction of more people being displeased than pleased. Overwhelmingly. Now, it is very possible that it's the loud minority drowning out the silent majority, but I rather doubt it.
And again, it is absolutely nothing about a happy ending versus a sad one. It's more like a coherent versus incoherent.
Then they're insane. The ending BREAKS the lore, this is fact. It destroys the universe, this is fact. The rest is subjective but I can't see how people could say it's good writing when they use a literal Deus Ex Machina(God out of the machine) not to mention multiple asspulls.
From what I can remember about the plot leak now it seems to be roughly the same with minor tweaks. The whole plot too, not just the ending. Bioware saying it was going to be different was just another PR lie among other gems like "the ending isn't going to be a A, B, C choice" and "it's not going to be space magic".
Essentially this. The differences if I remember correctly is that the relays weren't destroyed in the control and synthesis ending. Also it wasn't clear if Shepard died in the synthesis ending.
That's mainly it though.
I like to think of it more as a diabolus ex machina, because the choices presented destroy the universe in order to preserve it. It also goes with the sudden downer ending.
The catalyst is a deus ex machina. Some of the stuff stemming from the catalyst probably falls under the diabolus ex machina.
Opinions can be wrong. Some opinions are better and more logically sound than others. Fact. This is one of those times. If you feel satisfied with the ending of Mass Effect: You have terrible taste and an absolute disregard for logic, character development, and general plot mechanics. One cannot argue otherwise with honesty.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Reading Muzyka's post again, I'm pretty sure the ending itself wont be changed.
"Game content initiatives that will help answer the questions, providing more clarity for those seeking further closure to their journey".
Sounds more like extra missions, or an epilogue, rather than an overhaul.
"Game content initiatives that will help answer the questions, providing more clarity for those seeking further closure to their journey".
Sounds more like extra missions, or an epilogue, rather than an overhaul.
R_thanatos
Member
That a real rarity ... she shoudl preserve those people in museums for future generations.
For me the spectrum is divided in 2 clans
- ending is a disgrace , the lore is destroyed ..INADMISSIBLE , game is crap 0/40
- ending is a disgrace , but i had a good time and i'll move on to play something else
( there is this subtle race of aliens doing :
- i don't care about the story i'm having fun in the MP
)
Since the Catalyst comes out of nowhere and presents you with these three awkward options, I think devil in the machine is more suiting. It doesn't care if you live or die or if anyone else lives or dies. It doesn't come to save the day, just to alter the chess pieces by throwing them off the board.
I think it sounds more like they'll just add more dialogue to the Catalyst. Maybe it'll offer you a few dialogue options before sending you to your death*.
*Unless you pick the option in which you can live.
However I would argue that's a sign of godhood in that god isn't so concerned about the minor details(such as who lives or dies). Diabolus ex machina seems to be direct intervention by the writer to create a bad ending such as the Normandy running away, even though it doesn't make sense.
I think we could both agree though that the Catalyst is a literal Deus or Diabolus ex machina and the rest of the ending is composed of metaphorical ones.
RyanReedyMusic
Banned
I like the music of the ending and the feelings and emotions that are brought up with the ending. It is my opinion about those things. However they are true and factual. It is true I like the music and I felt those things. They are facts. They cannot be argued. Each person out there might disagree on what they feel is a good ending. My opinion is not in any way wrong or disregarding logic. However if someone did not feel those things or like the music. Then they will not relate or agree in any way. How can anyone disagree with something they never experienced in the first place?
Alright, since I said I'd come back and explain why I liked the ending, here it is:
First off, I think I'm in a different spectrum to most people with Mass Effect, because I don't really give a fuck about my choices coming to fruition at a later time. My choices did come to fruition throughout all of ME3, though, and I loved that. I wanted to see a conclusion to the story arc of the reapers introduced in the first game, and I got that. I'm a very different gamer coming into the wrpg fold, I guess. I personally play RPGs for the story first and foremost, and for the choices and the, I guess you could call it role-playing last. The choices I made throughout the Mass Effect series weren't made in order to gain something later. I guess you could say the choices weren't a game to me. The only thing I thought to gain from them was story, and that story happened as I chose them, so I was always satisfied.
Personally, since I'm kind of an outsider to WRPGs and one of my biggest complaints is that often good or poignant story points are put aside in order to let the player make a choice. So, generally, I applaud when a WRPG takes control of the world from the player and makes something interesting happen.
So that's my background on my perspective to the genre and the Mass Effect series. I thought it would be helpful to get that out there, since I realize I'm an odd man out not just for liking the ending, but I suppose for my entire perspective.
Alright, as for the "star child," AIs/VIs can take different forms. They're essentially code without a real body. The reaper knew about this because Shepard was at least partially indoctrinated. I'm not sure what the full theory is on that (I'm just going on my own here), but at the very least the illusive man was inside Shepard's mind, and the reapers were inside of his. It's not really a stretch that they'd know one of the biggest icons of Shepard's fears/regrets. The boy was a literary symbol that he couldn't save everyone, and he was always a painful reminder of that throughout the game. He was a reminder that not everything could be set right. And I think that's reflected in the choices, since none of them are perfect. He has to sacrifice no matter which way he goes. The galaxy has to sacrifice no matter which way they go. But again, back to the point, the reapers chose that body because he was sympathetic to it. It was showing that the reapers were life just like that boy. In destroying them he would be doing the same as destroying the boy. The prothean AI also talks about sensing something else that is keeping the cycle going, so I was expecting something to be there. And I was also expecting it to be a reaper or AI/VI, so the child didn't take me off guard at all.
Next, the conflict between synthetics and organics is kind of a central sticking point throughout the series. That was always kind of the central theme in Mass Effect. It's explored in the first one through the Geth and Saren. In the ME2 you see how the synthetics are creating life from organics with the human reaper. ME2 also explored the sort of superiority complex that organics tend to have with their own race through your interaction with Cerberus. Throughout the series, too, and especially in the ME3 you see the conflict between the Quarians and the Geth, and you have a number of solutions there. Javik also at one point hints at the fact that synthetics always rebel against their masters.
They do this because they are perfect, and organics are chaos. Through the eyes of the Quarian/Geth battle you see this played out. Yes you can kind of fix this conflict, but I think part of the whole series is really showing you the fact that people always have a fear of machines, and in turn (and partially because of that) the machines have a fear of humans. That conflict is real and eternal.
That conflict between chaos organics and perfect order of synthetics was solved in the galaxy's past by creating the endless cycle of the reapers. The chaos of organics could get to the point that they thrived and then they were harvested, so they could live on eternally perfect as synthetics in the form of reapers. After years and years of time and collective knowledge the organics finally found a way to beat that cycle, though.
I kind of knew there would always be basically three choices in the end, and I think the series foreshadowed that. You could follow the illusive man and control your enemy, you could destroy your enemy as you have been kind of planning to do, or you could find some sort of peace in the middle. That all manifests itself with the Geth/Quarian conflict. You come to really realize that just destroying something isn't the best answer, necessarily, and you've always known that controlling things isn't necessarily the best answer either. But these are choices that could be made. Also, I think Legion and his sacrifice, putting his code throughout all of the Geth perfectly foreshadows and almost mirror's Shepard's if you chose the synthesis. Really, the choices also symbolize our endearing questions when it comes to robotics, too. Do you control them? Do you just destroy them when they get out of hand? Those feel like eternal questions, because a robot can always become perfect. They can become better than us, and this series posits that there will always be those conflicting choices, unless we take a third choice where we are one.
I like those three choices, because it forces you to really question things philosophically. For the first time in the game I really had to stop and think about things. I had to think about not just the game consequences, but the ramifications of that decision. And I think that's what the writers were trying to do. They were also trying to spark conversation about those philosophies outside the game, I think. Instead of being just another choice where you say "oh you shot so and so? I didn't," this should have really been a sort of moral and philosophical debate between people. Do you destroy machines and risk the problem arising again? Do you think the problem would arise again? Do you even think of machines as being living beings? Do you follow the Illusive Man's way and control that which you barely know and basically become what you've fought? Do you control that which could arguably be called living? Or do you take the risks and sacrifice yourself and combine synthetic beings and organic beings? What about the ramifications of ending life as we know it in order to have peace? Is the only way to have peace between organics and synthetics to synthesize the two?
Personally, I also like the implication that the galaxy now has to rebuild itself. It had a head-start to begin with while finding all that tech, and I find it to be interesting that when you rebel against that you lose your footing. It's like biting the hand that feeds you. In the end, though, it had to be done. I also just like the whole idea that the galaxy is freed from its shackles now and instead of being kind of the same old place it was it now has to rebuild and redo things almost from the ground up with that knowledge of what came before.
As for the endings being similar/exactly the same: Sure they were color pallet swaps, but the budget isn't fucking infinite. The ending to Dragon Age: Origins was mostly text, and I remember being a bit disappointed in that. Most of those things I could kind of guess at anyway. I'd take a big philosophical and mysterious sort of ending to a series over a list of "this person goes on to do that" any day. And aside from budget reasons, I think having them be short and not showing much, again, forces you to really discuss and think about the implications of your decision. You don't get shown what exactly happens to the Quarians or the Geth or whatever. You have to think about that stuff and perhaps muse with others on it. I liked that.
Also, I have to add in to the discussion about the catalyst being a deus ex machina. To me the entire crucible was a deus ex machina from minute 1. It was never going to be anything else. If it was just a weapon that destroyed the reapers it would be a deus ex machina.
And yes, I know there are some plot holes there, like why Joker was flying in that direction and all that. The ending isn't perfect, I know that. There are very few movies, shows, or books without a few plot holes. Games are usually littered with the damned things, so I can take a few.
On the bright side, at least it wasn't as bad as the FFXIII-2 ending. Maybe that's why I liked it, too, since that was the last game I beat.
First off, I think I'm in a different spectrum to most people with Mass Effect, because I don't really give a fuck about my choices coming to fruition at a later time. My choices did come to fruition throughout all of ME3, though, and I loved that. I wanted to see a conclusion to the story arc of the reapers introduced in the first game, and I got that. I'm a very different gamer coming into the wrpg fold, I guess. I personally play RPGs for the story first and foremost, and for the choices and the, I guess you could call it role-playing last. The choices I made throughout the Mass Effect series weren't made in order to gain something later. I guess you could say the choices weren't a game to me. The only thing I thought to gain from them was story, and that story happened as I chose them, so I was always satisfied.
Personally, since I'm kind of an outsider to WRPGs and one of my biggest complaints is that often good or poignant story points are put aside in order to let the player make a choice. So, generally, I applaud when a WRPG takes control of the world from the player and makes something interesting happen.
So that's my background on my perspective to the genre and the Mass Effect series. I thought it would be helpful to get that out there, since I realize I'm an odd man out not just for liking the ending, but I suppose for my entire perspective.
Alright, as for the "star child," AIs/VIs can take different forms. They're essentially code without a real body. The reaper knew about this because Shepard was at least partially indoctrinated. I'm not sure what the full theory is on that (I'm just going on my own here), but at the very least the illusive man was inside Shepard's mind, and the reapers were inside of his. It's not really a stretch that they'd know one of the biggest icons of Shepard's fears/regrets. The boy was a literary symbol that he couldn't save everyone, and he was always a painful reminder of that throughout the game. He was a reminder that not everything could be set right. And I think that's reflected in the choices, since none of them are perfect. He has to sacrifice no matter which way he goes. The galaxy has to sacrifice no matter which way they go. But again, back to the point, the reapers chose that body because he was sympathetic to it. It was showing that the reapers were life just like that boy. In destroying them he would be doing the same as destroying the boy. The prothean AI also talks about sensing something else that is keeping the cycle going, so I was expecting something to be there. And I was also expecting it to be a reaper or AI/VI, so the child didn't take me off guard at all.
Next, the conflict between synthetics and organics is kind of a central sticking point throughout the series. That was always kind of the central theme in Mass Effect. It's explored in the first one through the Geth and Saren. In the ME2 you see how the synthetics are creating life from organics with the human reaper. ME2 also explored the sort of superiority complex that organics tend to have with their own race through your interaction with Cerberus. Throughout the series, too, and especially in the ME3 you see the conflict between the Quarians and the Geth, and you have a number of solutions there. Javik also at one point hints at the fact that synthetics always rebel against their masters.
They do this because they are perfect, and organics are chaos. Through the eyes of the Quarian/Geth battle you see this played out. Yes you can kind of fix this conflict, but I think part of the whole series is really showing you the fact that people always have a fear of machines, and in turn (and partially because of that) the machines have a fear of humans. That conflict is real and eternal.
That conflict between chaos organics and perfect order of synthetics was solved in the galaxy's past by creating the endless cycle of the reapers. The chaos of organics could get to the point that they thrived and then they were harvested, so they could live on eternally perfect as synthetics in the form of reapers. After years and years of time and collective knowledge the organics finally found a way to beat that cycle, though.
I kind of knew there would always be basically three choices in the end, and I think the series foreshadowed that. You could follow the illusive man and control your enemy, you could destroy your enemy as you have been kind of planning to do, or you could find some sort of peace in the middle. That all manifests itself with the Geth/Quarian conflict. You come to really realize that just destroying something isn't the best answer, necessarily, and you've always known that controlling things isn't necessarily the best answer either. But these are choices that could be made. Also, I think Legion and his sacrifice, putting his code throughout all of the Geth perfectly foreshadows and almost mirror's Shepard's if you chose the synthesis. Really, the choices also symbolize our endearing questions when it comes to robotics, too. Do you control them? Do you just destroy them when they get out of hand? Those feel like eternal questions, because a robot can always become perfect. They can become better than us, and this series posits that there will always be those conflicting choices, unless we take a third choice where we are one.
I like those three choices, because it forces you to really question things philosophically. For the first time in the game I really had to stop and think about things. I had to think about not just the game consequences, but the ramifications of that decision. And I think that's what the writers were trying to do. They were also trying to spark conversation about those philosophies outside the game, I think. Instead of being just another choice where you say "oh you shot so and so? I didn't," this should have really been a sort of moral and philosophical debate between people. Do you destroy machines and risk the problem arising again? Do you think the problem would arise again? Do you even think of machines as being living beings? Do you follow the Illusive Man's way and control that which you barely know and basically become what you've fought? Do you control that which could arguably be called living? Or do you take the risks and sacrifice yourself and combine synthetic beings and organic beings? What about the ramifications of ending life as we know it in order to have peace? Is the only way to have peace between organics and synthetics to synthesize the two?
Personally, I also like the implication that the galaxy now has to rebuild itself. It had a head-start to begin with while finding all that tech, and I find it to be interesting that when you rebel against that you lose your footing. It's like biting the hand that feeds you. In the end, though, it had to be done. I also just like the whole idea that the galaxy is freed from its shackles now and instead of being kind of the same old place it was it now has to rebuild and redo things almost from the ground up with that knowledge of what came before.
As for the endings being similar/exactly the same: Sure they were color pallet swaps, but the budget isn't fucking infinite. The ending to Dragon Age: Origins was mostly text, and I remember being a bit disappointed in that. Most of those things I could kind of guess at anyway. I'd take a big philosophical and mysterious sort of ending to a series over a list of "this person goes on to do that" any day. And aside from budget reasons, I think having them be short and not showing much, again, forces you to really discuss and think about the implications of your decision. You don't get shown what exactly happens to the Quarians or the Geth or whatever. You have to think about that stuff and perhaps muse with others on it. I liked that.
Also, I have to add in to the discussion about the catalyst being a deus ex machina. To me the entire crucible was a deus ex machina from minute 1. It was never going to be anything else. If it was just a weapon that destroyed the reapers it would be a deus ex machina.
And yes, I know there are some plot holes there, like why Joker was flying in that direction and all that. The ending isn't perfect, I know that. There are very few movies, shows, or books without a few plot holes. Games are usually littered with the damned things, so I can take a few.
On the bright side, at least it wasn't as bad as the FFXIII-2 ending. Maybe that's why I liked it, too, since that was the last game I beat.
Your argument has to do with the subjective enjoyment of something and not with the objective analysis of measuring internal logical consistency. Sure, I liked the atmosphere of the ending. The music was without question moving (I'm listening to the soundtrack right now) but that's not what the complaints are about. If you approach the ME3 conclusion with a critical eye, how well does it hold up? How well does it hold up not only to your expectations, but what the writers, producers, and developers have been hyping it for half a decade now? These questions are worth asking. If you frame it like that, then, yes, I have to say one's opinion can be wrong. The game's ending doesn't make sense from that point-of-view. We aren't questioning your enjoyment, just your after-the-fact justification for why others should feel accordingly. I liked the game; therefore, is not a valid mode of arguing.
However the whole child thing is an extremely forced plot device by the writers that doesn't make sense in regards to context for many of the players. Renegade Shepards shot dozens of people in the face not to mention just committing small scale genocide.
Synthetics vs organics was never the crux of the series. It certainly was important in ME1 but it's pretty much a sidenote in ME2. The only real time it's discussed is in Legion's mission which sucks shit as it's added so late in the game due to the fact that you get Legion so late in the game. Tali's missions don't discuss the underlying principles of it and it pretty much boils down to shooting the Geth. You do get that argument with the admirals but it seems they flat out ignore you as seen by that email you get after the trial from one of the admirals not to mention the outcome in ME3. Not to mention the argument with the admirals boils down to "We want our homeworld back" rather than some sort of argument about whether the Geth were in the right and whether they should treat the Geth as individuals.
Then there is the whole point that synthetics vs organics is a common argument nowadays in regards to a technological singularity. It destroys Nazara's talk with Shepard in ME1 as his whole spiel about organics not being capable of understanding is straight up bullshit. Not to mention the troll logic of using synthetics to destroy organics to prevent creating synthetics.
The rest of your post is you talking about philosophical questions that the game has brought up even though it's been done before repeatedly and better. You then throw out discourse on the plotholes and other objective things that fail under a more critical analysis.
The reason I go for the latter is because all the options have severe consequences. So while it may not care for life (I mean it thinks it's doing everyone a favor by Reaperizing everyone who can create AIs.) it presents options that are detrimental to our hero. Why would anyone want to become a Reaper. Why destroy synthetics/AIs. Why does Shep have to run into the lasers. Why leave lingering thoughts of suspicion against synthetics.
The Catalyst is just there to screw with the mind of the protagonist and give way to an uncertain world. Before things get good they have to get bad. It was just poorly done.
I don't want to think about this anymore.
Indoctrinated presence detected. Switching to defense mode.
As muse mentioned, it's entirely possible to like all 3 things you liked and still dislike how the ending plays out and, more importantly, understand why the ending takes a giant shit on the franchise (I'm one of these people)
I guess that, in your own way, you enjoyed the ending. And I can totally accept that(even if I can't agree with that)
My main issue with the "philosophical" significance of the ending is that Mass Effect has never ever been that way. It has always been a "light" space-opera where space Shepard could swoop in and save the day.
It's never been deep, thoughtful, interrogative, provocative or in any way controversial.
So, why introduce those elements in the last 5 minutes of the game? When the core game cannot support these themes, why try your hardest to make it seem like those endings are the logical conclusion? And really, spoilers here:
That might be what Casey Hudson and Mac Walters meant by "high-minded" but I maintain they missed that target by a mile.
Then, there is the question of choice and how they influence the story. Something the ending mostly ignored.
My main issue with the "philosophical" significance of the ending is that Mass Effect has never ever been that way. It has always been a "light" space-opera where space Shepard could swoop in and save the day.
It's never been deep, thoughtful, interrogative, provocative or in any way controversial.
So, why introduce those elements in the last 5 minutes of the game? When the core game cannot support these themes, why try your hardest to make it seem like those endings are the logical conclusion? And really, spoilers here:
The Reapers purpose was to "recycle" a galaxy in order to prevent a war between synthetics and organics? The Reapers being synthetic being themselves? GIANT MOTHERFUCKIN WHAT. How can that makes any sense?
That might be what Casey Hudson and Mac Walters meant by "high-minded" but I maintain they missed that target by a mile.
Then, there is the question of choice and how they influence the story. Something the ending mostly ignored.
Not directly related, but (spoiler alert): It presents options that are detrimental to its own programming/agenda, even. Even though it presents the crucible as some sort of capability enhancing device to enact a new solution, two out of three are shite and either can go or will directly go against its programming. And the third (synthesis) supposedly solves the problem, but seems like a cop out, since now the problem, rather the parameters, have changed. I can't believe the thing is this stupid and/or narrow minded and yet it is.
They should have just cut after Anderson died. Let the crucible do whatever, war assets decide what's left after the battle, written epilogue.
Uh, seeing as the entire series is basically about the reapers and them coming back it really is the crux of the series. As I said in my post, ME2 was a bit about other things. It's main point in the series was showing the extent that a species centric group would go. It showed the extent that species themselves would go for self preservation or even just raising themselves above other species. It was a bit of a sidetrack, but overall it still dealt with some of those man v machine issues. I think Tali's missions touch enough on it that it becomes a large part. And I think 3 is where the conflict is really brought around to "Should we really just be shooting all the synthetics?" and "Aren't they really like us in a way?" The fact that the arguments of the admirals boils down to some shit excuse really furthers things. They have no regard for synthetics. Organics have no regard for synthetics on the whole. You can solve this a bit, but the underlying problem is always there. That was a direct lead up to that ending, that this conflict is inherent.
Sure it's been done before and better. Pretty well every game's plot has been done before and better in movies or books. What's your point? I personally loved the journey and the interactivity of this implementation of those ideas.
I'm not throwing out discourse on plot holes, man. I'm not going to sit here and say the ending is perfect. You guys are really absolutist with this. Since I like the ending I have to like everything and everything is perfect? Not so much. I like the underpinnings of the ending they had. I like the philosophical implications of the endings they chose, and I respect that they chose to go in that direction. Could they have done it better? Hell yes! Could they have done a lot of the game better? Hell yes. I mean fuck I want different planet scanning while they're at it, because that was far more annoyingly dumb than the ending.
Really, I'm not here to try and defend the whole thing. I'm not the writers. I don't know what they were thinking and what they meant by everything. I'm just trying to state that there really is some good in the ending. It doesn't "shit all over the franchise" and "shit all over every minute you played the game" nor is it the "worst ending ever!" Not everything about it was bad. Bioware did some good things with it, and perhaps they did some gutsy things with it. I respect that, while at the same time acknowledge why some people don't like it. What's so bad about my position?
Ugh, I would have been so bummed at that ending... It would have felt like the easy way out, and a cop out to me, personally. It's what happened with Dragon Age: Origins and while I liked that game well enough, I was kind of bummed at the ending.
It's a very flawed AI/VI. I mean, it's a working paradox.
As for the Anderson scene, I agree. It was the climax for me. However, they quickly decided to go with an anticlimax. And what a low that was.
RedAssedApe
Banned
Man this is just like Final Fantasy XIII-2. Don't sell the game...we got awesome Lightning DLC coming soon! Perfect that XIII-2 gets Mass Effect DLC. 
WrenchNinja
Member
The Reapers aren't scary because they're machines. Being machines has never been the issue about the reapers. It's that they've been destroying civilizations for ages and have been manipulating every species progress from the very beginning. An otherworldly group of beings have been controlling everything and are coming to destroy us all. Them being machines means jack shit.
Yes, but does the paradox of the game become painfully prescient as it draws inexorably towards its conclusion?
ME2 really drops the AI discourse until Legion. Hell ME1 really doesn't discuss it in depth other than the Geth went rogue and tried to kill everybody. Legion and ME3 are the only places where you can say there was an indepth argument mainly because the audience had a very onesided perspective on the issue and even then it wasn't discussed that much. In ME2 the main villains that the player interacts with are the Collectors which are organics. Yes they're taking their orders from Harbinger but the level of genetic modification isn't even clear till halfway through the game. Even then the process is described more as an organic development done by the Reapers compared to a technological one. They describe it in terms of a hive mind which is an organic trait.
Tali's missions doesn't touch upon different solutions or even perspectives among the Quarians until the very end with the brief chat with the admirals. That's like one chat among a bunch of other quests.
The reason the Reapers are scary isn't because they're machines but rather their overwhelming power. Nothing the Reapers do is representative of AIs as a whole. Atleast with Skynet there was a clear difference in thought between the humans and Skynet. Skynet was interested primarily in self-preservation and weighed the pro/cons of keeping organics around. Skynet acted like a machine. The same cannot be said of the Reapers.
So the ending isn't original and has been executed better. You just like them throwing the questions in there even though you can't argue your perspective to the Star Kid? It's not a true argument in that the player is told all of these things without the true ability to respond or even question the validity of said statements by the Star Kid.
ME3's ending is like the awkward moment you realize you've been going the wrong way in a public space. So to not look like a chump, in case anybody is watching, you look at your cellphone and make a face and change direction. That's what happened to the plot in this series.
I don't see how what we got is any better, since you get even less of a resolution, with more questions raised than needed. What we have now is just them closing the book hurriedly.
Man this is just like Final Fantasy XIII-2. Don't sell the game...we got awesome Lightning DLC coming soon! Perfect that XIII-2 gets Mass Effect DLC.
Maybe the DLC for Mass Effect 3 will show Noel and Serah traveling through Historia Crux to stop the Catalyst's endorsed RGB ending.
That doesn't exactly matter. The central conflict in the series is literally synthetics vs organics. Sure that isn't the original point of why they're scary. It's what they do that's scary, but the veil is lifted and that's the central thesis on why they do what they do. There are still fractal points in the series that touch on that subject, anyway. It was always sort of there. And really it doesn't matter if it was the entire series' absolute central plot (which I was never really arguing it was). I personally believe that it was a very central portion to ME3. An entry in a series can pick up a plot thread and run with that as a central point. It wouldn't be the first time, and it won't be the last. And using that plot thread as a central crux for the series in the finale again wouldn't be the first or the last time it's done, either. Them being machines definitely does mean jack shit in this game.
Tell me if Reapers were replaced by organics controlling ships with similar firepower, would it matter and how would it change the game?
My argument is that it wouldn't. The Reapers do very little to define themselves as true AI.
Thanks for that, I can certainly see where you're going with that. And I felt the same way when I had to make a choice at the end. Like you said, it forced me to think of the possible ramifications of that decision. I must have stood there for the longest time trying to decide what to do. But my biggest gripe about the game is that at the time, it felt like the single most important decision I ever had to make in the game, and yet.... to find out that all possible outcomes were the same with a couple color pallet swaps feels like a huge kick in the nuts. In the end, it simply didn't matter, the galactic readiness rating, unlocking the synthesis option, the reward for all that effort just wasn't worth it.
You mention that the ending cutscenes were probably a result of budget limitations. And thats fine, but I don't buy that it was for the better, that is to encourage more discussion about it. I say its just poor resource allocation on Bioware's part. If they had spent more time on presenting the ramifications of each choice you make at the end, it might have gotten a better response.
EmCeeGramr
Member
But from the second game on it's established that there are synthetics who hate the Reapers, and from the tail end of the first game that the Reapers hold synthetics in contempt. Given those, and the fact that two-thirds of the series establishes synthetic/organic alliance against the Reapers (elevating Reapers above that conflict), it seems strange to take that seemingly resolved side plot and turn it into the central theme, while actively contradicting what the player has seen.
How much money you got? How far do you want to go? 100s don't come cheap.
I forgot about EDI. That's a solid point in that for a good portion of the series you have synthetics helping you. Not to mention the synthetic implants that save your life.
It would certainly change the philosophical underpinnings. The real point of ME3 was that these were absolute, driven, powerful, perfect machines. The whole point was the cycle created in order to curb the eternal conflict of the chaos of being organic, imperfect beings and those perfect synthetic ones that they've created. The fact that the reapers are synthetic also plays with the players mind a bit. You almost want to just destroy them no matter what, because they're machines with no other goals, in your mind. They're barely life, since they're not like us. But if it were just another species controlling ships? That's just war, and you're also already sympathetic to fellow living creatures. Changing them to organics with ships changes a lot. Paragon Shepard, for instance, would probably try and just keep reasoning with them. He wouldn't have wanted to just destroy them all. At the very least destroying them all wouldn't be as much the absolute goal to a sort of paragon Shepard in that instance. With them being synthetics even the best of us wanted nothing more than to just destroy them. Also, with them being synthetics it makes the "controlling them" option that the illusive man wants to do so much more realistic. There really would be people trying to control a machine. After all, it was created by something, so it can be controlled. That entire quandary would be squashed by them being organic.
I really do think it is a bit of both. I think they came up with an elegant solution that could be portrayed easily in 3 different ways. I mean you didn't know it was the same until you saw the other endings. You would have never guessed it. It's short and to the point for a point, I think. I think of it kind of like FF7's ending, except that you choose the meaning in-game and before the FMV happens. Same sort of thing.
'Synthetics vs organics' refers to the eventual war between sythetics created by organics, and organics. Like quarian and the geth. Not between reapers and organics. Reapers haven't exactly been in conflict with organics until ME3; Shepard and crew are the only ones fighting them before that. Besides, reapers are not synthetics.
Net_Wrecker
Member
You (ME3 spoiler)
saw evidence of synthetics basically leaving organics alone, then brought together and ended a war between organics and synthetics literally hours prior to the Star Child telling you it's not possible.
Dacon
Banned
....The reapers have been wiping out organics for ages. The did it the protheans and those before them.
The reapers are also definitely synthetic.
Metallic on the outside, pulpy organic bits on the inside. Seriously kill it with fire.
Also, this thread has become the spoiler thread 2.5.
Its called bad writing when you sort of fuck up themes like that. But apparently in Mass Effect its really deep and interesting or something.
Metallic on the outside, pulpy organic bits on the inside. Seriously kill it with fire.
Also, this thread has become the spoiler thread 2.5.
This is what Marauder Shields was trying to protect us from. Soon ME3 ending discussion will assimilate all topics on GAF